Think of the manuevre as how difficult the ship is to hit. The higher the number, the harder to hit. Its based on the ships length and beam IIRC, so it would change even as the speed is reduced from damage. That is why big ships like BBs and CVs have low numbers, and small ships like PTs have very high numbers for manuevre.

The reason why follow up waves often score more hits is because the hit probability factors in (besides mvr which remains the same) the target speed (reduced by dmg), the DL (increased by damage), and maybe sys damage for evasive action (but this is just a guess).

Think of the manuevre as how difficult the ship is to hit. The higher the number, the harder to hit. Its based on the ships length and beam IIRC, so it would change even as the speed is reduced from damage. That is why big ships like BBs and CVs have low numbers, and small ships like PTs have very high numbers for manuevre.

At least this is how I think it works.

I don't think that is it.

I had always thought ship MVR was simply turn radius. I think I read once that a standard pre war US battleship had a turn radius of 700 yards to go 180 degrees.

I tend to agree with Shark7 here. I always viewed the mvr value to be a measure of how hard the target is to hit, and as such an abstracted value for a combination of attributes - size, maneuverability, accelleration,...

Well my typing skills aren't what they used to be. In my previous post I meant to say that mvr would not change with the drop in speed.

Mvr really is nothing more than a part of the equation that determines how hard a ship is to hit. Speed and damage also figure into that, so as your ship takes damage the mvr (IE size) won't change, but the speed is reduced and damage affects is actual ability to turn and acceleration.

The MVR rating is likely the constant in the equation determining the 'to hit' number required to actually score a hit on a ship. But that constant is different for each ship depending on size. A big BB like Yamato is manuever 22. Yamato is HUGE, so naturally it has a low target number to hit it. Looking at a PT boat which is mvr 92, it is plain to see that a 77' ship would be very hard to hit with a naval gun or by dropping ordnance from an airplane.

To simply it, here is an example of how it could possibly work:

MVR + Speed - (damage * modifier) = Target Number (the number you need to roll to score a hit) And just for my example, lets call the modifier 0.5 (50%)

So in my example, and undamaged Yamato has a to hit target number of 49 (22 + 27 - (0 damage * modifier)).

Now lets say Yamato has 50% system damage and reduced speed to 15 kts. In this example, we have 22 + 15 - (50 *0.5) = a target number of 12.

If the system does work similar to how I have done mine, then it easily explains why big ships get hit more often, and why a damaged ship becomes an ordnance magnet. I could be completely wrong, though, so keep that in mind. I haven't seen 'under the hood', but the system I have posted (or something similar) does seem logical.

... Maneuverability depends, first and foremost, on how the game engine uses the values in its calculations. There are several calculations, for several different conditions, so maneuver values have to be suitable for all of them. Tweaking for one will likely break the other 3 or 4.

The maneuver values lie on a functional curve. Basic values are developed from the speed/size ratio, but the plot is not linear. Actual cruise speed is important, cruise vs full speed differential is important, hull K factor (displacement vs waterplane) is important, speed-power and power-length ratios are important. Then the engine takes over and the calculated values are scrunched into the processing box by a functional fit.

A ship having the same speeds, but 1/3 the size of another, will not have 3 times the maneuverability, ships having the same size but different speeds may have the same maneuverability because of hull configuration, list is endless...

... Maneuverability depends, first and foremost, on how the game engine uses the values in its calculations. There are several calculations, for several different conditions, so maneuver values have to be suitable for all of them. Tweaking for one will likely break the other 3 or 4.

The maneuver values lie on a functional curve. Basic values are developed from the speed/size ratio, but the plot is not linear. Actual cruise speed is important, cruise vs full speed differential is important, hull K factor (displacement vs waterplane) is important, speed-power and power-length ratios are important. Then the engine takes over and the calculated values are scrunched into the processing box by a functional fit.

A ship having the same speeds, but 1/3 the size of another, will not have 3 times the maneuverability, ships having the same size but different speeds may have the same maneuverability because of hull configuration, list is endless...

Alfred

I recall it being said that Titanic had what was really too small a rudder to enable her to turn adequately (might or might not have been a contributing factor in her demise). So certainly design issues beyond raw size, speed, etc. as you say.

Very interesting. Now I understand better why Momi and Wakatake APDs get whacked by aircraft in the Guadalcanal scenario every time. With max speed of just 18 knots they are as nimble as mine trolleys. Talk about the Tokyo "Express".